Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Seaside Park council voices opposition to DEP "real rules," residents urge care on annexation
Summary
Council members said they oppose the DEP 'real rules' in their current form and noted coordination with other local mayors and legislators; residents urged the council to slow consideration of annexation and asked for clearer, redlined study materials.
Council members and residents addressed two linked coastal concerns at the March 19 meeting: a formal local opposition to the state Department of Environmental Protection’s so-called "real rules" and citizen unease about the timing and clarity of an annexation study.
A council member highlighted local coordination, saying the mayor and other coastal leaders had been working with state legislators and urged residents to read and engage with the legislation; the council identified three state senators and the assembly member from the district as active on the issue. The chair described the rules as "a substantial overreach" of DEP authority and said the borough had joined other coastal municipalities in opposing the rules.
Public commenters reflected two perspectives. Some urged fighting the rule changes and backing bipartisan legislative efforts; others urged the borough to work with the DEP on adaptation and science. Mike Spadafino said local decision-makers should "work with [the DEP]" and consider research and projections about the long-term survival of barrier-island communities. Council members responded that they preferred negotiation but also noted disputes about study methodologies.
Separately, the public questioned speed of the annexation ordinance’s introduction; several residents asked for a redlined version of the annexation addendum showing what changed from the original study and for more deliberate consideration before a second reading. A council member acknowledged the request and said the addendum was posted online and that the ordinance text would be corrected where it erroneously referred to only a "portion" of the acreage.
The council's opposition to the DEP rules was recorded as part of the consent resolutions; no litigation decision was made at the meeting. The council left next steps—publishing corrected study materials and scheduling a second reading—open to staff and consultants.
